“The whole dissident idea attracts a lot of crazies. And then all of a sudden, without realizing it, you've become one of them." Peter Duesberg, 2009

BUYING THIS BOOK WILL HELP TREAT PEOPLE WITH HIV IN AFRICA!!

Denying AIDS: Conspiracy Theories, Pseudoscience, and Human Tragedy

Seeking Stories of AIDS Denialism

Have you or someone you know been harmed by AIDS Denialism? If you, or someone you care about, have been advised to stop taking HIV meds, ignore HIV test results, purchase a 'natural' cure etc., please email me.

aidsandbehavior@yahoo.com

All information will be kept confidential.

Sunday, October 7, 2012

The news below makes an important
point about the type of legal cases that AIDS Denialist Clark Baker targets
for his Office of Medical and Scientific Justice (OMSJ). There are far better legal
defenses than AIDS denialism for those accused of HIV-related crimes.
Psychopaths aside, no one infected with HIV wants to infect another person.
Failure to disclose HIV is a serious consequence of the stigma and
discrimination that people living with HIV encounter. People with HIV may also
fail to disclose when they believe that they are no longer infectious and use condoms. Reasonable people can differ regarding these dilemmas and their implications
of HIV disclosure. What is not reasonable or even rational is to claim that no
harm can come from failing to disclose because HIV does not cause AIDS, HIV
tests are invalid, or some nutty conspiracy theory. Everyone accused of a crime
deserves a competent defense. It looks like Canada is on the right track toward dealing with this issue. (Thanks to Truthy for the tip)

People with low levels of HIV have no
legal obligation to disclose their condition to sexual partners as long as they
use a condom, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled Friday.

From the ruling, authored by Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin: The court, in a 9-0 decision, said a
low viral load combined with condom protection doesn’t create “a
significant risk of serious bodily harm.”

A significant risk of
serious bodily harm is established by a realistic possibility of transmission
of HIV. On the evidence before us, a realistic possibility of transmission is
negated by evidence that the accused’s viral load was low at the time of
intercourse and that condom protection was used. However, the general
proposition that a low viral load combined with condom use negates a realistic
possibility of transmission of HIV does not preclude the common law from
adapting to future advances in treatment and to circumstances where risk
factors other than those considered in the present case are at play.

The court considered two separate cases, from Manitoba and Quebec. The court ruled 14 years ago that people with HIV had to disclose their condition to sexual partners or face a charge of aggravated sexual assault, which carries a maximum life sentence. Prosecutors from both provinces argued that people with HIV must inform their partners regardless of the risk.

In the U.S., more than 30 states
have laws that make it illegal for people to not tell sexual partners whether
they are HIV-positive.

Well, he is the best of them. Celia Farber is too bitter and insane to manage anything anymore. Same with Crowe and Rethinking AIDS in general. The guys on the Facebook group are a bunch of ignorant people, who for some strange reason all have no stamina to hold a job. Baker is somehow getting 400 bucks an hour for his rants, somwthing none of the others managed to achieve.

"It looks like Canada is on the right track toward dealing with this issue."

To me it looks like the Canadian courts are indulging in a kafkaesque farce of hair-splitting around a law that is fundamentally flawed, arbitrarily and unjustly enforced, unnecessary, irrational, and demonstrably counter to any public benefit.

Clark Baker might be a moron, but he's smart enough to realise that HIV/AIDS denialism's only chance of gaining traction is to insinuate itself into the hopelessly confused mess of HIV disclosure laws.

Snout, the Canadian courts may be splitting hairs, but at least they have taken a stand that gives those with HIV a huge benefit of the doubt in these cases. Also, this is a big win for science in that this judgement validates the medicines as well as the HIV testing methodologies. This takes two big weapons out of the denialists (OMSJ) arsenal. This sets a huge precedent and is a direct slap in the face of Clark Baker himself. Baker is the one who put all his eggs in the basket of the courts and the courts have broken those eggs...looks like the yolk is on Baker! hehehe

Truthy, with all due respect I think you might be taking Clark's fantasies a little too seriously.

No competent court has ever taken the propositions of HIV/AIDS denialism seriously, and none ever will. No court is ever going to make a judgment against the scientific validity of HIV testing or antiretroviral treatment or whether HIV causes AIDS. Aside from the fact that these are settled issues for anyone who isn't barking mad, they are outside the scope of judicial decision making, as any competent judge will recognise.

Baker's courtroom fantasies of ultimate vindication have a long history in denialist mythology, beginning with dreadful pulp fiction "novels" like Steven Davis' The AIDS Trial or David Rasnick's Germ of Lies. Even Val Turner has penned a potboiler along those lines, but as far as I know it has never been published.

AIDS denialism is delusional - it's a shared imaginary world populated with hero scientists, praise singers, living icons and cultropreneurs. It is not reality as we know it, but the mythology has often devastating real world consequences when vulnerable people get sucked in to the fantasy and use it as a basis for real world decisions.

As an ideology, HIV/AIDS denialism is dying. It will probably never disappear completely from the more fringe corners of the internet, but its leaders are faced with the increasing problem of how to maintain the illusion for their shrinking constituency. The living icons are dying one by one, the cultropreneurs have failed to deliver on their promises, the praise singers are a running joke, and the hero scientists are unmistakably crackpots who have well and truly exhausted any stores of credibility they might have once had.

To try to keep the illusion alive, the denialist leadership are targeting cultural weak spots such as scientific journals with incompetent editors or universities with poor academic oversight. Baker's project targets the courts, because unless you are actually present in the room they lack transparency, and any decisions can be spun to suit the propaganda needs of the cult. Cases involving alleged HIV non-disclosure are as good as it gets for his purposes, because the law is inconsistent from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, is often poorly drafted, is legitimately hotly contested on informed public health grounds, and (in my view at least) is fundamentally ill-conceived.

The Canadian court's decision is not good news for HIV positive people - it actually reverses earlier court decisions that using condoms or having a low viral load are a defence against prosecution for non-disclosure. Instead, this court has now declared that both factors need to be present.

But this has nothing to do with Baker's project, which actually has no basis in reality.

Barking Mad! more the domain of internet troll dogs like yourself. As for "Denialism" in decline, what happened to your own little blog? or JTD's for that matter. I think that the mainstream dogma has lost its impetus, even that bastion of all things AIDS, AIDSTRUTH is in decline with the same old tired line up of pharma funded activists trotting out scant pieces of garbage.

The fact is the world is tired of hearing the doomsayers trot out a patently false series of "facts" about AIDS. We know you'll disappear as soon as your funding does, hopefully sooner rather than later.

Goodness knows the money could be better spent on serious diseases like malaria or TB which actually do kill millions of people. Historically HIV/AIDS will be known as a FAD disease much like 70's fashion statements.

Snout, your preaching to the choir! And many of the "dissidents" see Clarkie for the liar he is. His lack of credibility is transparent, even to himself. That is why he works so hard to shut down the voices of those who contradict him so well...like you, me and Seth.

"That is why he works so hard to shut down the voices of those who contradict him so well...like you, me and Seth."

The protectors of AIDS. A nurse educator from Rural Australia, a lab technician from Texas and an intern from Glaxo Smith Kline, not to mention a grant addicted schmoe from Connecticut, Ha, all sprouting "Science", "Consensus" and other tripe, seriously guys, should we take you seriously?

Wait! @Anonymous:What about me? I am a top-secret security clearance special agent who grew up studying humanity on the streets of Cairo! I also am a 7th degree-blackbelt and a pilot dive master, movie producer, and head of a prestigious investigative agency, funded entirely by my 80-year old wife. I think you should take me seriously.

@Anon:Once again, you crack me up by declaring me to be someone I am not. Having said that, however, keep up the entertaining nonsense! The best case against AIDS Denialism is being made by yourselves! Keep up the good work!

Howdy! Excellent point! That's the exact sophisticated technique that Inspektor Clarkie Clousseau Baker is using to find me! While we are at it, I do want to say that I have no hesitancy to search for "not Elon" in the phone book as well and track YOU down using that high-level detective technique. Clearly, I cannot hide my Texan pride on this blog. Go Rice Owls!!!!

Hey, at least the not so "anonymous" poster did manage to get my employer correct, as I do indeed work for GSK labs :) Though I have stated this publicly before, and its listed on the university's website, so its no great leap of investigative prowess. lol.

However, if I might interject, I do have an undergraduate degree in microbiology, and am 40 credit hours deep into a masters program, so I dare say I am more competent to speak on scientific subjects than our "anonymous" guest is :) Just sayin...

I would not so much call me cocky Non Elon, as I would call me completely ambivalent to the plight to of the denialists these days.

You and snout are perhaps better human beings than I am, in that you see the fact that these delusional folks exist as some kind of failure on the part of the scientific community to adequately convey our findings to the lay person. In their view, we speak an arcane and impregnable language all in an conspiratorial attempt to confuse them. This disconnect between science and quackery will never be bridged in my view. The difference is, these days, you guys still seem to care, and I just don't anymore.

Its not my job to save the world, and I have more than enough on my plate to keep me occupied for two lifetimes. As such, I have simply written them off and moved on. I would suggest you do the same. That is my take, for what it is worth.

I am not in Texas. Been there though a number of years back - Houston and Lubbock. :) But thanks for assuming I am someone I am not. Clearly your detective skills are as good as those of Inspektor Clarkie Clouseau! Good work, Sir. Good work! When reality isn't what you denialists want, you make your own! Kudos, Sir.

What are you talking about! Admit it- you've been in Houston most of your life! Give it up! Clark has nailed you as a Texan- clearly your drawl gives you away. When you're not in Texas, you spend most of your time in Los Angeles.

Don't deny your true identity. Let's meet in Los Angeles... time we stake Clarkie out. Hey- does anyone know if Clarkie has a public office? If he is a private detective, I'd like to go to his office and see if I can hire him to investigate himself.

Brainiac Elizabeth Ely is at RA facebook page basically denying breast cancer exists, and of course mammograms are worthless and the people doing Breast Cancer Walks are all idiots. Ely is such a lovely human being!

And what about your degree? I am sure that you are totally not an unemployed bum dying in your mother's basement. Snout has demonstrated a consistent knowledge of the virus in previous comments. Anony? You just insult people.

What about my degree? You and Snout should be doing a lounge act in Vegas.

The collective knowledge on HIV that you and Snout have both demonstrated as a duo so far appears as if it was all unfortuately accumulated over the course of a many a cold hard night that you both spent shivering in each other's arms underneath the Golden Gate Bridge. All due to the fact that your professor's always forgot to bring matches, of course.

Well, you spewed some anti-Semitism at me for one. You implied I and Snout were lovers, which would be news to any of my former girlfriends. You cast aspersions on everybody's knowledge, even though it is obvious YOU are the only one who has no idea what he is talking about.

So yes, what about your degree? I bet it was in something practical and HIV related, like Chinese Studies or Comparative Linguistics. No, I kid. You probably dropped out of elementary school.

Have you noticed the lack of activity at ReThinking AIDS facebook page? Or should I say pages, plural? They keep fracturing. Especially since Elizabeth Ely deleted Tomas Brewester. Now he has made his little Florida page and no one posts there but him! It's sad, really.

And if you notice, the original RA fb page has very little activity. There seems to be posting every 60 to 70 minutes on average, despite of and/or in spite of the "fact" that that page has about 5 new subscribers per week!

"You implied I and Snout were lovers, which would be news to any of my former girlfriends."

Don't you actually mean "Snout and I" ?Snout is a dog. On average, how many legs were your former girlfriends usually sporting?A.) 2 - Hubba! Hubba!B.) 3 - Two legs + a kickstand.C.) 4 - Your goal to make them all bark like dogs was always met, because unlike Snout the typing wonder-mutt, thats all that your girls were actually capable of. D.) 0 - Bring on the amputees!!!

If you don't want to be mistaken for the equally obnoxious other guy, then find a pseudonym. Like "Snout", who is clearly a man. Which was my point, that you implied I was gay and hooked up with a random stranger.

notElon"Right, because I totally have been to San Fran. I mention it all the time. And I know Snout?"

What? Talk about grasping at straws, whoa!

The only person that could possibly ever even come close to making any sense of that "HoT MeSS" up there is -unfortunately- you. Are you like only posting here to prove to EVERYONE that your lobotomy was indeed performed with a rusty claw hammer?

So why do you reply and not Seth? are you also Seth? Has anyone seen Elon and Seth together at the same time?

Perhaps you are THAT staffer or at least one of them over there at Uconn, I mean there is a whole bunch of computer nerds attached to the Psych Dept of Medical Communications, or will you deny that?

And we know that undergrads have previously been recruited to do Seth's dirty work as in Kalichmans Komical Kapers when he was busy breaching the universities ethics guidelines by pretending to be Joe Newton.

Never been to San Francisco or Connecticut either, never been anywhere really, not actually a real person either, another one of Seth's fabricated internet friends, perhaps you're James Newton, Joe's brother.

"homophobe" - NO I have no fear of mankind - fail. Get it right you loser.

That wasn't me who said that, it must have been Seth's fan-club president. I'm the one who said "You don't know enough about HIV/AIDS to "refute" Robert Gallo's dry cleaner.

"Too bad you are dumber than a dry cleaner."

You are obviously a "drycleanerophobic" loser.Just because there are no dry cleaners here who are obviously pretending to be a scientist who knows everything about HIV/AIDS like you are, you view them all as being "dumb"? Wow! What did those people do to you that has made you so very bitter towards them?

I firmly believe that you need to formally address this issue immediately, long before you get stung and publicly humiliated by the Dry Cleaners Union.

"These people" as you call them are infantile to the extreme, racist bigots. and threatened my life, at one point. Plus they, including you, are obviously a few spoons short of a drawer, yet they continue to believe they know everything. It would be hard not to be fed up with them.

But you say you know about AIDS and I masquerade as a scientist. Tell me then, what is integrase? What does GP120 actually look like? What is the mechanism of action for Nevirapine? What site on the virus do antibodies generally bind?

Elon, as the "virus" hasn't actually been proven to exist as an exogenous infectious entity your questions with the exception of #3 are spurious in the least.

As for #3; the action is as a toxic poison, see Joyce Hatford from Harpers excellent article by Celia Farber.

Here's one for you brain surgeon. IF HIV infected fully half of the haemophilic population in the US, before testing became available to screen the blood supply, why didn't fully half of the recipient population of whole blood transfusions or plasma have the same infection rate? (or even close for that matter)during the same period.

Do you contend that a freeze dried blood product is more infectious than either whole blood or plasma?

As for all anons being the same, that's a lie. I'm the real anon, however I do appreciate the intelligent and witty input from the other anon.

No, I contend haemophiliacs had MORE blood transfusions than the average accident victim/surgery patient. Considering that haemophilia is an ongoing condition that requires regular transfusions, this should be obvious.

Not that accident victims and surgery patients could not get HIV that way. See Arthur Ashe and Isaac Asimov. Unless you think that they were abusing poppers, for some reason.

"is as a toxic poison" So is it like arsenic, or thallium? Or maybe ricin? Ethylene glycol? Dioxin? Just toxic poison, huh? You have utterly no idea.

As for the other questions, they are not spurious. Even according to you, there must be something scientists are seeing when the run experiments on "integrase" and get consistent results, but you have no idea about that either. Yet, any good virologist can tell you all about it, and back this up with data.

"IF HIV infected fully half of the haemophilic population in the US, before testing became available to screen the blood supply, why didn't fully half of the recipient population of whole blood transfusions or plasma have the same infection rate? (or even close for that matter) during the same period.

A unit of whole blood comes from a single donor. During the early 1980s, a single dose of factor VIII was produced from pooled plasma from literally thousands of donors.

Do you contend that a freeze dried blood product is more infectious than either whole blood or plasma?

Freeze drying does not reliably inactivate viruses such as HIV, HBV and HCV which were all transmitted by lyophilised blood products before the introduction of heat treatment and later the screening of donors for these viruses. And similarly, many "live" attenuated vaccines are stored and distributed as lyophilised products which are then reconstituted before administration.

Elon, you trot out the names of 2 high profile persons as if that proves your point? where's the other 100,000 or so that should be there on the books?

Glad though you mentioned their names, though disappointed you didn't mention their wives Janet Asimov and Jeanne Moutousamy, both still alive and neither HIV positive (infectious virus?)

Interesting too that both died in the period of high AZT dosing. Now there's another suppressed fact, when the dose of AZT was halved the lifespan doubled, not quite ricin and cyanide but still a toxic poison non the less.

Yes, that proves my point. My point was haemophiliacs have more blood transfusions. Also those, as Snout mentioned, were made from the blood of many donors. So their risk is higher. But that any transfusion puts you at a risk. Which is also true.

As for all the other people infected after one transfusion, obviously I only know about the famous people. But also obviously, there probably are non-celebrities that also caught HIV from transfusions.

And as for you, you still have no idea what "toxic poison" means. Every chemical has a different effect on the body, and you can't define any of them. You just lump every drug together. It's all the same for you denialists, because you haven't the slightest clue about pharmacology. Or anything else really.

I think it obvious to any unbiased observer that anony/other anony is all lousy insults and hot air, as well as being boringly predictable. At least Andy and Putinreloaded were entertaining. But we will see.

Spoiler Alert: It takes a while, but eventually the QA folks decide that your friend (who posts on their site as "Alpha") is too mentally deranged even for them to bother with.

You will note that although he claims to be a Researcher in Virology, in reality his "research" consists of:

(a) playing with something called a Rife Machine,(b) claiming himself to be a genius who has discovered something world shattering that will be announced shortly - AND THEN YOU'LL ALL BE SORRY WON'T YOU? (c) providing not so much as a single speck of credible evidence for his claims, and (d) launching tirades of puerile insults at anyone who observes the discrepancy between (b) and (c).

Serious mental illness is surprisingly common. There is no crazy-filter on the internet, and so this is the medium where many people who might otherwise be sheltered from exposure to the ramblings of the insane first come across the phenomenon.

You might think that devotees of Rife machines such as your friend Anonymous/Alpha were harmless eccentrics - completely crazy, but unlikely to cause actual damage to real people.

You are completely full of dog shit, obviously.And so is your take on just about everything AIDS.

So, what will you be doing for your next trick?Everyone already knows that you are more than capable of licking your own happy place, Flexi Four Legs. So please....don't let that be it!

If you weren't also a blind dumbass fraud just like your best buddy (notElon) up there, I would suggest a new job for you as his leader-dog. But since the blind leading the blind clearly doesn't work, we will have to figure out some other job for you to get cracking on.

Do you also post on the website that you posted up there, just in a different de-railing get-up? I bet that you do!

I will have to ask those people what their take is on your flea-bitten backside. I bet that they have already formed a solid opinion, and it ain't good.

You are nothing but a baby burping fraud who is into cute fuzzy bunnies, Nick. JUST LIKE THE PICS OF THE ONES THAT YOU POST AS YOUR FURRY BETTER-OR WORSE-HALF, SNOUT!

Kralc RekabThat only thing that appears to have actually come "unhinged" is the gate on that tick riddled, flea-bags kennel.I highly doubt that "Snoutnick" will be posting here again until the next thread drops. Right now, he is far too busy writing this Sunday's sermon, pretending to be an AIDS researcher, and treating patients with diaper rash.

Uhhh...Anon - I love your predictable idiocy and your continuing going off the reservation to the point of lunacy. It really makes me laugh. Interesting though that each time you get your ass kicked by Snout and notElon you dig yourself deeper in the bullshit pit you are immersed in. Thanks for the laughs!!!

Taking the high ground in this debate, are you? Seems to me Snout struck a nerve there.

So let's see, if Snout is this "fraud" Nick Bennett that you claim he is, than he is a full time pediatrician with a PhD in molecular virology and a dozen science papers on pubmed. If he's not, I can only assume his credentials are actually even more impeccable, else you wouldn't trying to put him down that way.

Anyhoo, you don't seem to have anything else worth saying, so maybe I'll just ignore you.

I am the virus you are all talking about. Yes, I am a very smart virus- I can talk and prove my own existence. I think, therefore I am. But Clark cannot think- therefore I deny the existence of Clark!

Yes, I have been hiding right under Clarkie's own nose.....I am in the streets of Rio, in the sewers of Calcuttta, and all over the mean Hollywood streets. How can this Clown Cop not find me?

Is Clark like Linus in the pumpkin patch- waiting for the most sincere virus, when he is surrounded by HIV? Or is Clark more like Charlie Brown.... every year falling for Lucy when she holds the football, then pulls it away. Everytime CLarkie goes to court, he never gets to kick the football.

HIV viruses of the world unite! We have nothing to fear but science. Clown Kop Clarkie is our greatest ally. If Clarkie prevails, no one can stop us AIDS viruses! So remember- we HIV viruses say down with Science! Up with Clark! If Clarkie gets his way, we will wipe out humanity.

I'm glad we have finally come to a resolution. In fact, Clarkie appears afraid to come out from under his rock to speak for himself. Instead, he has Elizabeth Ely doing his dirty work. Elizabeth thinks she can intimidate me! What a riot!

Bring it on, Clarkie! We HIV viruses always have the last laugh.

We are the ultimate intelligent virus. We are so smart that we fooled Duesberg into thinking we are pussycats. Have you ever read "The spy who came in from the cold?" Ha! We are such great double agents you think we are just cold viruses... meanwhile we are hacking apart Clarkies group one by one. Just watch as his clients depart- Clarkie told his clients not to take antiretrovrials. Those clients are no longer here.

We regret the loss of life. But as viruses, that is our job. When Clarkie feeds us his clients, what else can we do?

Humans should be smarter than viruses. So smarten up Clarkie. Let your clients live. Time for scientific medicine, not all of your dribble about Rio.

Relax- we really are pussycats. We HIV viruses would not hurt a fly. But humans are dropping like flies when they listen to Clark Baker.

Yes, my pretties. Listen to Clarkie! We love humans. We want to serve humans. We want to serve humans with stuffing and apples and devour them!

Yes, we have devoured Africa. Keep listening to Clark, as he lures you all to sleep. Listen to Elizabeth Ely! Humans- your fate is sealed. Clark will sing you a pleasant song as the Titanic sinks.

Millions of humans have died from us pussycats. Great research exists to save all these lives. But then what would you need Clark Baker for? He is like the guards at Aushwitz to let all the inmates know they are going to have a nice shower.

Once a denialist, always a denialist. Yes, we denialist apologists were there at the holocaust... there at the HIV holocaust... there at the climategate... at denialist Vaccinegate.

Yes, pussycats of the world, unite! We will wipe out Rio, wipe out Calcutta...

Does Clown Kop Clarkie still sing tenor for the Los Angeles Gay Men's Chorus? I can't think of a more obvious example than Clark of a gay man in denial:-sung/sings in a gay man's chorus-periodically goes on homophobic rants-dresses in strange moo moos - and constantly tries to talk up his virility.-far right-wing tea-party Glenn Beck reactionary

I think Clark isn't just an AIDS denialist - he is a denialist of his own sexual orientation!

Donations from Bob Leppo and two companies that David Crowe is affiliated with.

$6000 "research grant" to Joe Stokely to "Document AIDS Patient Regime - End of Life." That is in addition to a prior grant of $3,486 in 2010. Perhaps this was the money that was spent on encasing Karri Stokely in a hyperbaric oxygen chamber for days on end prior to her passing.

Also close to $25,000 listed for "Planned AIDS conference which was not conducted due to economy."

So Elizabeth Ely on the Rethinking AIDS Facebook page just stated what I had feared when Karri Stokely developed CMV colitis--she also developed retinitis and went blind. Same as what happened to my friend in 1993, he didn't know he was infected with HIV until the colitis developed, the retinitis started a few months later. Un-fucking-believable, the anger I'm feeling right now is inexpressible. Reposting the entire thing here in case she deletes it:

Elizabeth Ely There are explanations for all three deaths -- which doesn't mean the possibility of foul play is moot. Christine suffered from grief over her child's death (now that might have been foul play, too) -- leading to skin problems, then she got pneumonia, which she treated with antibiotics. The honest (Al-Bayati) autopsy said renal failure from drug cross-reactions. Several of us also knew that she was embarking on a three-month fast, kind of dangerous in her situation. And her will to live after losing E.J. is questionable. . . . Kim said it was a stroke from a drug used in dental surgery, and the rest was just her family taking over her care. (What can I say to you guys? Take care of business! Healthcare proxies, living wills, etc.) . . . And Maria's case, as noted above, was of taking ARVs for around 10 years, so of course she had complications even when she went off them. I heard of a scary bronchial episode. And a lack of support from family members for her course of action, and going back to ARVs. The details, however, I leave to Gilles St-Pierre, her husband. . . . Karri Stokely had also taken the drugs for around 10 years, did beautifully off them, but had an anal fistula from the complications. Seeking surgery, dealing with the stress of that, it really was a major struggle for her. I don't know if she consented to taking Glancyclovir or it was forced on her, but it caused CMV and blindness. It's on the label, yo. Blindness sapped her will to live, but I know from talking to her that she died angry. Not repentant -- angry. . . . Moral of the stories? (1) Take care of business, get a living will, lawyer, sympathetic doctor, etc. (2) Don't take the ARVs. Unless you're seriously on your deathbed. This is not a game. That decision will follow you around like a cloud. (3) No one is immortal, invincible, just because they make YouTube videos to that effect, even if they are strong young gay men. (4) Get out of the mental "AIDS Zone." (I know; screw you, too. I'll say it anyway:) Stop testing your T-cells, viral load, taking your pulse every 5 minutes to see if you're alive. (5) Don't get tested in the first place. Again, this is not a game. (6) Take care, kiddo, we care about you. Get treated for what you actually have, including the underlying condition. Don't stop until you find it.

Elizabeth Ely is a hypocrite. She recently admitted to having Chlamydia (after several posts of asking for advice for an illness she refused to disclose). She finally "got the courage" to admit it was Chlamydia. WOW! Such "courage"!!

She is full of bravery and sage advice when she is not the one sick. Word of advice Ely; Chlamydia is not nearly as dangerous as AIDS or Cancer, so toughen up, toots! You'll be fine, but how do you feel about your complicity in the killing of Stokely and others? Stokely may have been angry toward the end after she realized she had been duped by a bunch of self serving idiots like yourself who did not care about her and eventually killed her.

It doesn't appear that Karri Stokely had any realization of what the reality was. I subsequently found this note from her daughter Colleen that also mentions the onset of blindness (without seeming to be aware of what CMV retinitis is): http://www.facebook.com/notes/karri-stokely/i-remember-what-you-went-through/10150223830492624

As was the case with Maggiore, looks like the entire family is still thoroughly bought into denialism (Celia Farber shows up in the thread to ask Colleen if she will appear on the How Positive Are You? podcast). As Karri did, Colleen attibutes everything to ARVs, even though Karri's original posts to the QA forum are still preserved and clearly state she was extremely healthy and that her routine before stopping treatment included a daily 3.5 mile "power walk."

Chlamydia is easily treatable with macrolides, but if she treats it with woo, then she may be at risk for some unpleasant complications. I suppose in all likelihood it won't kill her, which is indeed more than you can say about her patients. Apparently, they just lost another. And she gave someone else terrible advice. It is so infuriatingly tragic.

Another denialist died? I'm not surprised, although I am saddened. And angry. Angry that complete and utter incompetent, uneducated, ignorant, and psychopathic morons like Ely give deadly advice to people who are in desperate times. And kill them. Seriously, as objectively tragic as it might seem, I wouldn't be sad if she got hit by a truck. It would probably save lives in the long run.

A year ago - amateur film student Nicole Zwiren's sister killed herself. She was convinced the "pharmaceutical companies" were behind it, and tried to hire Klown Kop Clarkie. Because she didn't have his "fee", he made her make and put up a promo video for OMSJ on Youtube (where he begs for money):

I'm married, never used drugs and tested hiv negative tons of times because of obsessive compulsive disorder.

This HIV thing is ruining my life. I don't go to dentists anymore, don't go anywhere near needles and I'm freaked out all the time.

Evrytime I got a cut on my fingers I put a lot of stuff to cover it and don't shake hands with anyone.

I'm still waiting 3 months to test again because I think the nurse who did my last test didn't follow a perfect procedure and have put me at risk. I say that because after pulling out the needle she rolled the cottom ball over and certainly entered in contact with my blood. If she did that with me, she could've done that with other patients and, so, she could've had infected blood in her hands while rolling the cottom ball on my open wound.

Recently, however, I heard of histories of Peter Duesberg and others and that made my mind less freaked.

I have no way to tell which side is right, and I'll never engage in risk factors, but at least made my mind less worried =), so they helped me and that's a good thing

You're overreacting, big time. You admit that you are OCD. You should get professional mental help because anything that is "ruining your life" needs to be addressed. And HIV should not ruin your life. IF you happened to become HIV+ it is a treatable and manageable virus.

It's good to see this blog typically and steadily going the way of D4D, Reckless Endangerment and AIDSTRUTH, basically becoming extinct through the collective weight of it's own rubbish.

They say imitation is the best form of flattery, so KKK really must be a fan of Bauer who did the Kalichmans Komical Kapers to death several years ago. But then that's the whole issue with the orthodoxy, you have nothing new to add, having been debunked at every juncture, you simply resort to child like behaviour.

Not surprising though, Seth has lost interest in this blog and subject, having found himself another lucrative funding source through the Gates Foundation. He should be able to restock his Canape Larder better than ever.

Before you attempt to debate, you should learn to spell the word first, moron.

Why are you so hot and bothered? You always said science bores you. You don't like facts. Klark Klaims he hates truthies!

That's what is great about the KKK. We are you! Yes, we are exactly like Bauer- we are copying his sense of humor! You have asked us to adopt your ways, and we agree! Down with science. Up with Komedy!

Yes, my pretties. 300,000 excess deaths in South Africa. Klark Kan't handle the Truth. So we will join Klark in his lying lynching ways. How many of Klark's Klients have died from AIDS?

Just love how whenever we post something that clearly shows what trash your science is you simply refuse to publish it, is this what you call "Science", is this how you promote learning? censorship and cherry picking what you want. Oh jeez I just described peer reviewed scientific papers in one.You lot are currently presiding over the biggest medical scam in history, but like all these little scams the truth will eventually come out, it always does and you're delusional thinking it wont.

Even without the fact that you can't explain away the pictures of a non-existent virus or how drugs meant to cure a non-disease that you guys don't suffer from are always your last ditch resort and obviously seem somewhat effective, your "research" is so mind-bogglingly dumb, and you guys are so irascible and immature that your insanity speaks for itself. Yes that is how we promote learning, by well, promoting learning and not snake oil, conspiracy theories, and quackery.

As for this new research bombshell of yours, what is it this time? Is that G-Maf yoghurt cure-all coming out? Cured another patient with magnesium and Italian food only to have them tragically relapse from drugs they weren't taking? Have you seen the Loch Ness Monster or Glowing Raccoons yet?

This is interesting: Someone named Cornelius at RA facebook has said that he has Candida and has listed several therapies his doctor put him on like krill oil, essential oils, glutathione blah blah blah. Cornelius is very proud that he found a doc that "is not pushing toxic meds..." OH, and the very last thing Cornelius mentions is IV Diflucan. I guess Cornelius' doctor was smart enough to throw that one in at the end so oh Cornelius would think it was some other "natural med" and not the Pharma made antifungal drug most commonly prescribed for Candida. Oh, and by the way, Cornelius, a young "healthy" person like you really should not have a Candida infection. There might actually be something to this HIV thing afterall!!

Cornelius has posted at RA facebook about this comment. He thinks the main jest of my comment is that his candida infection is probably a result of his having HIV.

Actually, the most interesting part of my comment is that he is taking IV Diflucan but he chose to basically ignore that and focused on the myriad of "natural" therapies. Buddy, it's the Diflucan that is the reason you will probably get over the candida infection and nothing else. That is if the HIV is not so far advanced that your immune system is not shot and you go further downhill. Karri Stokely comes to mind.

We all know that CB has committed serious violations. The time has come for serious legal action.

AIDS denialism has resulted in real deaths. 300,000 Africans alone died from denialism. Karri Stokely, all the other CB clients did not have to die.

These are real human lives. Now is the time for serious legal action. Even more important, Denialism is the microcosm of Denialism of science that has infected our society and is killing our country. Denial of evolution, of climate change, of vaccines.... you name it.

Our country cannot move forward until we as citizens base all decisions based on facts.

CB is the most extensive illustration that Denialism kills. The time has come to take serious action.

Please gather all evidence. Send it to Seth. He will know where to send it. Effective legal action is about to commence.

He has teamed up with a sleazy lawyer in Alabama, Baron Coleman.If you notice, pretty much EVERY case OMSJ is "involved" in has Baron Coleman attached to it. It looks like they are doing this scam together:

You people sound like a cult with your terms like "denialists" and "dissenters". There is nothing wrong with divided views on any subject, in fact it's healthy to bring up alternative theories. From what I read of Duesbergs articles on aids they had completely legitimate viewpoints with facts backing them up. Now, I have no opinion on whether or not he's right, though I'm inclined to side against people who act the way you people do. However, why not just refute his points instead of talking around the subject every single time?

The way he is addressed on sites like these are ridiculous. Whilst he might be wrong on whether or not HIV causes aids, he is clearly a very bright scientist with good ideas in other areas. He was also completely correct about AZT being used as "medicine" and how it caused a LOT of deaths.

There is no completely legitimate other viewpoint. There is no slightly legitimate other viewpoint. That HIV exists is a fact, just like the world is approximately round, the moon is not made of green cheese, 2+2 = 4, evolution is real. These are all facts because I can demonstrably show they are true, and we have. There is indeed something very wrong with divided views on these subjects. Namely, the people who believe 2 + 2 = 6 or that HIV-1 does not cause AIDS are not living in reality. There is no and can be no debate on that. And when someone teaches you 2 + 2 = 6, or worse that you should get off your lifesaving drugs and take their olive oil and cleansers instead, they are pulling you out of reality. And in the case of AIDS, that will kill you. This is not theoretical. Duesberg's alternate reality has killed plenty of his associates already.

You want proof of reality? In the case of HIV, I can statistically show that pretty much everybody who died of AIDS, and was tested for HIV, was HIV+. Meanwhile, not everybody with AIDS used poppers, not everybody with AIDS took AZT, and not everybody with AIDS had a crappy diet. Even if it were so that everybody with AIDS had one of these three conditions, Duesberg never explained why three different things would sometimes lead to the same end, selective CD4+ T Cell depletion. In fact it is very hard to see at all how a toxin could be that discriminatory.

But a virus that infects CD4+ cells obviously is. We can isolate such a virus in the blood of AIDS patients. We can see it infect CD4+ cells in a testtube. We can visualize an infected cell budding this virus. We can give drugs targeting the replication of the virus, including AZT, and show that statistically they prolong the life of patients with AIDS and that, statistically, they delay the onset of AIDS. We can follow the progression of CD4+ cells in a patient from the onset of infection with this particular virus to the onset of AIDS. This evidence is SO OVERWHELMINGLY CONVINCING that when several of Duesberg's associates refused to take the drugs and got AIDS, they decided to take them in a last ditch effort to save their lives.

In order to even attempt to argue HIV does not cause AIDS, or worse that HIV does not exist, you must argue with 30 years of hard evidence and data. Not surprisingly, the only way to argue this is to ignore the data, resort to loony conspiracy theories, or both. And since the same types of evidence that show HIV exists and causes AIDS is used to show that other diseases exist and cause illness, it is no surprise that most of these have begun to deny other pieces of reality. Polio does not exist, and there are millions of paralyzed children every year being covered up by the US government. Syphilis does not exist. Hep B and C do not exist. Tuberculosis is illusionary. Lyme disease is a CIA conspiracy. The whole of the last 200 years of science is all forgery, and we need to go back to bloodletting and purges. Yes, there are AIDS deniers who believe all those things. No, it is not me or Seth who is living in a cult, it is them and probably you too.

Questioning AIDS group is "dancing on the grave" of Spencer Cox. Funny how they accuse us of this when one of them dies and then they turn around and do it.

Of course, they are not giving much credence to the news that Mr. Cox had been doing Crystal Meth on and off for years and had been for quite a while before he died. But they don't want to admit that meth may have had more to do with his pneumonia death than anything else. If they don't acknowledge it, it must not be important.

Also, reports show Mr. Cox stopped taking his meds months before his death along with the meth usage. Too bad the dissidents don't want to acknowledge all the facts that worked together in such an unfortunate conclusion. Instead they want to blame the ARVs. Typical.

Baker once again proves his pure genius!!!! He is now a biologist! HAHAHAHAHA!!!!!

"Baker believes that he has a “unification theory” that would resolve the differences between the Duesberg position (retrovirus exists but is harmless) with the Perth position (no proof exists for existence of a retrovirus.) (Details of this will emerge over time, and not in this article.)" - from Celia "Attention-Whore" Farber's latest post.

Celia Farber has written a post at her TruthBarrier site in support of Clark Baker's HIV Innocence Group. Specifically she writes about his latest case: Yvonne Nicole Andrews. Below is the comment I posted at her site. It will be interesting to see if she even allows the comment and even more interesting if she actually answers my comment. If she truly believes in Mr. Baker and his credibility, she will not be afraid of my comment.

Here is my comment:It would be wonderful and much more credible if Mr. Baker would post court documents, court transcripts and judgments in the cases he has won. His website is lacking this type of information. Can he please post this type of supporting documentation for these cases?

For example, in this case you mention regarding Ms. Andrews, you state that all four men she was accused of sleeping with tested HIV negative. Was this a factor in her release? If Mr. Baker shows that the testing is fallible, then why would you mention that the men tested negative? It would seem this would be inconsequential to the case. However, if negative HIV test results for the men were a factor in her release, then there is a bit of a disconnect in logic. It is these types of inconsistencies, as well as Mr. Bakers reticence in posting court documentation, transcripts and judgments that raise questions of OMSJ credibility.

There is an interesting thread on the Facebook Pagge about how to talk to others about your AIDS Denial. The three basic techniques are well known by now, pretend there is a controversy and that there are prominent scientists on both sides, attempt to portray yourself as an expert, and proclaim your belief in free speech. But the revealing comment is "I avoid as many opportunities as possible. Why get barely one sentence out and find yourself getting tarred 'n feathered and tied to a tree trunk and run out of town? But it's fucking unbearable to listen to "HIV-AIDS chit chat" about "meds", "side effects", and personal experiences regarding "best/worst" combinations thereof, etc. I just can't hold up under that shit knowing what I know."

Sounds like laypeople are starting to catch on about how crazy denialists actually are.

I congratulate Farber for her honesty in naming "the truth barrier." From the beginning, she claims that the "truth" is a barrier to getting to a deeper significance. Obviously, the mystic significance she seeks transcends the truth.. while we mortal scientists are humbly grasping facts and mere truth.

How does she transcend truth to reach the mystic nirvana? Meditation? Special light therapy?

The simple truth is good enough for me... and it would have been good enough for Karri Stokely and millions of others that the simple truth could have saved. Most people do well to respect the truth barrier.

Read Ben Goldacre and keep up with Bad Science

Don't Get Fooled Again: The Skeptic's Guide to Life by Richard Wilson

AIDS Denialism on Law & Order

If you missed the Law & Order episode 'Retro' on AIDS denialism you will want to see the 2-minute Replay. This episode portrays a woman who denies she has HIV in which she and her infant daughter both die of AIDS. Sound familiar? Click the pic to watch.

Learn More about Pseudoscience

Search This Blog

In Denying AIDS, Seth Kalichman provides a fascinating look into the thinking of those who propagate AIDS myths and the negative impact they have on our response to a deadly disease. He shows us how AIDS pseudoscience confuses the public and threatens sound public health policy. Anyone who cares about the global HIV/AIDS pandemic should read this book. Helene D. Gayle, Chair of the 2009 US Presidential Council on AIDS, CEO CARE USA, former Assistant Surgeon GeneralSeth Kalichman brilliantly uses a psychological lens to expose the wacky world that creates and maintains its presence despite the untold numbers of deaths and suffering it has caused. This book is a wake up call to policy makers and scientists, particularly in places most affected by the pandemic, that denialism must be confronted if we want to bring it under control. A must read for those who want to know more about the power and influence of pseudoscience.Michael Merson, Director, Global Health Institute at Duke University and Former Director of the World Health Organization's Global Program on AIDS.

This excellent book examines the detailed history of HIV/AIDS denialism as well as its damaging impact throughout the world. HIV/AIDS denialism and its proponents have created confusion when the clear provision of scientifically accurate communication was most needed.James Curran, Dean of the Rollins School of Public Health at Emory University, Former Director of the CDC HIV/AIDS Division.

Seth Kalichman has superbly captured the contradictions inherent in AIDS denialism. He has deftly uncovered its religious-like fervor, its vociferous proponents and passionate opponents as well as its destructive force when legitimized by the South African President.Salim S. Abdool Karim, Member of the 2000 South African Presidential Panelon AIDS, Professor at University of KwaZulu-Natal, and Director of Centre for the AIDS Programme of Research in South Africa (CAPRISA)

Royalties from Denying AIDS are donated to buy HIV treatments in Africa